Protection From COVID-19 mRNA Vaccination and Prior SARS-CoV-2 Infection Against COVID-19-Associated Encounters in Adults During Delta and Omicron Predominance.

BACKGROUND: Data assessing protection conferred from COVID-19 mRNA vaccination and/or prior SARS-CoV-2 infection during Delta and Omicron predominance periods in the United States are limited. METHODS: This cohort study included persons ≥18 years who had ≥1 health care encounter across 4 health systems and had been tested for SARS-CoV-2 before 26 August 2021. COVID-19 mRNA vaccination and prior SARS-CoV-2 infection defined the exposure. Cox regression estimated hazard ratios (HRs) for the Delta and Omicron periods; protection was calculated as (1-HR)×100%. RESULTS: Compared to unvaccinated and previously uninfected persons, during Delta predominance, protection against COVID-19-associated hospitalizations was high for those 2- or 3-dose vaccinated and previously infected, 3-dose vaccinated alone, and prior infection alone (range, 91%-97%, with overlapping 95% confidence intervals [CIs]); during Omicron predominance, estimates were lower (range, 77%-90%). Protection against COVID-19-associated emergency department/urgent care (ED/UC) encounters during Delta predominance was high for those exposure groups (range, 86%-93%); during Omicron predominance, protection remained high for those 3-dose vaccinated with or without a prior infection (76%; 95% CI = 67%-83% and 71%; 95% CI = 67%-73%, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: COVID-19 mRNA vaccination and/or prior SARS-CoV-2 infection provided protection against COVID-19-associated hospitalizations and ED/UC encounters regardless of variant. Staying up-to-date with COVID-19 vaccination still provides protection against severe COVID-19 disease, regardless of prior infection.

Accuracy of COVID-19-Like Illness Diagnoses in Electronic Health Record Data: Retrospective Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: Electronic health record (EHR) data provide a unique opportunity to study the epidemiology of COVID-19, clinical outcomes of the infection, comparative effectiveness of therapies, and vaccine effectiveness but require a well-defined computable phenotype of COVID-19-like illness (CLI). OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to evaluate the performance of pathogen-specific and other acute respiratory illness (ARI) International Statistical Classification of Diseases-9 and -10 codes in identifying COVID-19 cases in emergency department (ED) or urgent care (UC) and inpatient settings. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective observational cohort study using EHR, claims, and laboratory information system data of ED or UC and inpatient encounters from 4 health systems in the United States. Patients who were aged ≥18 years, had an ED or UC or inpatient encounter for an ARI, and underwent a SARS-CoV-2 polymerase chain reaction test between March 1, 2020, and March 31, 2021, were included. We evaluated various CLI definitions using combinations of International Statistical Classification of Diseases-10 codes as follows: COVID-19-specific codes; CLI definition used in VISION network studies; ARI signs, symptoms, and diagnosis codes only; signs and symptoms of ARI only; and random forest model definitions. We evaluated the sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value of each CLI definition using a positive SARS-CoV-2 polymerase chain reaction test as the reference standard. We evaluated the performance of each CLI definition for distinct hospitalization and ED or UC cohorts. RESULTS: Among 90,952 hospitalizations and 137,067 ED or UC visits, 5627 (6.19%) and 9866 (7.20%) were positive for SARS-CoV-2, respectively. COVID-19-specific codes had high sensitivity (91.6%) and specificity (99.6%) in identifying patients with SARS-CoV-2 positivity among hospitalized patients. The VISION CLI definition maintained high sensitivity (95.8%) but lowered specificity (45.5%). By contrast, signs and symptoms of ARI had low sensitivity and positive predictive value (28.9% and 11.8%, respectively) but higher specificity and negative predictive value (85.3% and 94.7%, respectively). ARI diagnoses, signs, and symptoms alone had low predictive performance. All CLI definitions had lower sensitivity for ED or UC encounters. Random forest approaches identified distinct CLI definitions with high performance for hospital encounters and moderate performance for ED or UC encounters. CONCLUSIONS: COVID-19-specific codes have high sensitivity and specificity in identifying adults with positive SARS-CoV-2 test results. Separate combinations of COVID-19-specific codes and ARI codes enhance the utility of CLI definitions in studies using EHR data in hospital and ED or UC settings.

Relative Risks of COVID-19-Associated Hospitalizations and Clinical Outcomes by Age and Race/Ethnicity-March 2020-March 2021.

Background: Limited data exist on population-based risks and risk ratios (RRs) of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)-associated hospitalizations and clinical outcomes stratified by age and race/ethnicity. Methods: Using data from electronic health records and claims from 4 US health systems for the period March 2020-March 2021, we calculated risk and RR by age and race/ethnicity for COVID-19-associated hospitalizations and clinical outcomes among adults (≥18 years). COVID-19-associated hospitalizations were defined based on COVID-19 discharge codes or a positive severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 result. Proportions of acute exacerbations of underlying conditions were estimated among hospitalized patients with select underlying conditions, stratified by age and race/ethnicity. Results: Among 2.6 million adults included in the patient cohort, 6879 had COVID-19-associated hospitalizations during March 2020-March 2021 (risk: 264 per 100 000 population). Compared with younger, non-Hispanic White adults, non-Hispanic Black and Hispanic adults aged ≥65 years had the highest hospitalization risk ratios (RR, 8.6; 95% CI, 7.6-9.9; and RR, 9.3; 95% CI, 8.5-10.3, respectively). Among hospitalized adults with COVID-19 and renal disease or cardiovascular disease, the highest proportion of acute renal failure (55.5%) or congestive heart failure (43.9%) occurred in older, non-Hispanic Black patients. Among hospitalized adults with chronic lung disease or asthma, the highest proportion of respiratory failure (62.9%) or asthma exacerbation (66.7%) occurred in older, Hispanic patients. Conclusions: During the first year of the US COVID-19 pandemic in this cohort, older non-Hispanic Black and Hispanic adults had the highest relative risks of COVID-19-associated hospitalization and adverse outcomes and, among those with select underlying conditions, the highest occurrences of acute exacerbations of underlying conditions.

Estimation of COVID-19 mRNA Vaccine Effectiveness Against Medically Attended COVID-19 in Pregnancy During Periods of Delta and Omicron Variant Predominance in the United States.

Importance: Pregnant people are at high risk for severe COVID-19 but were excluded from mRNA vaccine trials; data on COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness (VE) are needed. Objective: To evaluate the estimated effectiveness of mRNA vaccination against medically attended COVID-19 among pregnant people during Delta and Omicron predominance. Design, Setting, and Participants: This test-negative, case-control study was conducted from June 2021 to June 2022 in a network of 306 hospitals and 164 emergency department and urgent care (ED/UC) facilities across 10 US states, including 4517 ED/UC encounters and 975 hospitalizations among pregnant people with COVID-19-like illness (CLI) who underwent SARS-CoV-2 molecular testing. Exposures: Two doses (14-149 and ≥150 days prior) and 3 doses (7-119 and ≥120 days prior) of COVID-19 mRNA vaccine (≥1 dose received during pregnancy) vs unvaccinated. Main Outcomes and Measures: Estimated VE against laboratory-confirmed COVID-19-associated ED/UC encounter or hospitalization, based on the adjusted odds ratio (aOR) for prior vaccination; VE was calculated as (1 - aOR) × 100%. Results: Among 4517 eligible CLI-associated ED/UC encounters and 975 hospitalizations, 885 (19.6%) and 334 (34.3%) were SARS-CoV-2 positive, respectively; the median (IQR) patient age was 28 (24-32) years and 31 (26-35) years, 537 (12.0%) and 118 (12.0%) were non-Hispanic Black and 1189 (26.0%) and 240 (25.0%) were Hispanic. During Delta predominance, the estimated VE against COVID-19-associated ED/UC encounters was 84% (95% CI, 69% to 92%) for 2 doses within 14 to 149 days, 75% (95% CI, 5% to 93%) for 2 doses 150 or more days prior, and 81% (95% CI, 30% to 95%) for 3 doses 7 to 119 days prior; estimated VE against COVID-19-associated hospitalization was 99% (95% CI, 96% to 100%), 96% (95% CI, 86% to 99%), and 97% (95% CI, 79% to 100%), respectively. During Omicron predominance, for ED/UC encounters, the estimated VE of 2 doses within 14 to 149 days, 2 doses 150 or more days, 3 doses within 7 to 119 days, and 3 doses 120 or more days prior was 3% (95% CI, -49% to 37%), 42% (95% CI, -16% to 72%), 79% (95% CI, 59% to 89%), and -124% (95% CI, -414% to 2%), respectively; for hospitalization, estimated VE was 86% (95% CI, 41% to 97%), 64% (95% CI, -102% to 93%), 86% (95% CI, 28% to 97%), and -53% (95% CI, -1254% to 83%), respectively. Conclusions and Relevance: In this study, maternal mRNA COVID-19 vaccination, including booster dose, was associated with protection against medically attended COVID-19. VE estimates were higher against COVID-19-associated hospitalization than ED/UC visits and lower against the Omicron variant than the Delta variant. Protection waned over time, particularly during Omicron predominance.

Laboratory-Confirmed COVID-19 Among Adults Hospitalized with COVID-19-Like Illness with Infection-Induced or mRNA Vaccine-Induced SARS-CoV-2 Immunity - Nine States, January-September 2021.

Previous infection with SARS-CoV-2 (the virus that causes COVID-19) or COVID-19 vaccination can provide immunity and protection from subsequent SARS-CoV-2 infection and illness. CDC used data from the VISION Network* to examine hospitalizations in adults with COVID-19-like illness and compared the odds of receiving a positive SARS-CoV-2 test result, and thus having laboratory-confirmed COVID-19, between unvaccinated patients with a previous SARS-CoV-2 infection occurring 90-179 days before COVID-19-like illness hospitalization, and patients who were fully vaccinated with an mRNA COVID-19 vaccine 90-179 days before hospitalization with no previous documented SARS-CoV-2 infection. Hospitalized adults aged ≥18 years with COVID-19-like illness were included if they had received testing at least twice: once associated with a COVID-19-like illness hospitalization during January-September 2021 and at least once earlier (since February 1, 2020, and ≥14 days before that hospitalization). Among COVID-19-like illness hospitalizations in persons whose previous infection or vaccination occurred 90-179 days earlier, the odds of laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 (adjusted for sociodemographic and health characteristics) among unvaccinated, previously infected adults were higher than the odds among fully vaccinated recipients of an mRNA COVID-19 vaccine with no previous documented infection (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] = 5.49; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 2.75-10.99). These findings suggest that among hospitalized adults with COVID-19-like illness whose previous infection or vaccination occurred 90-179 days earlier, vaccine-induced immunity was more protective than infection-induced immunity against laboratory-confirmed COVID-19. All eligible persons should be vaccinated against COVID-19 as soon as possible, including unvaccinated persons previously infected with SARS-CoV-2.

Serum Progesterone Levels in Pregnant Women with Obstructive Sleep Apnea: A Case Control Study.

BACKGROUND: Pregnancy is a risk factor for sleep disordered breathing, including obstructive sleep apnea (OSA). Progesterone, one of the key hormones in pregnancy, a known respiratory drive stimulant, increases ventilation and may protect against OSA. We aimed to examine the relationship between circulating progesterone and OSA, after accounting for body weight and gestational age. METHODS: A case control study was conducted of pregnant women with OSA and those at low risk for the disorder. Cases were identified by ICD-9 code and review of medical record. Controls were identified if they scored zero (never) for snoring, apnea, and gasping on the multivariable apnea prediction index questionnaire immediately following delivery. Subjects with available stored first and/or second trimester residual serum samples were then included in this study and serum analyzed for progesterone. Raw progesterone levels were adjusted for the effects of gestational age and maternal weight. RESULTS: Twenty-seven cases and 64 controls with available serum were identified. Women with OSA had greater maternal weight and higher rates of related comorbidities, compared to controls. Progesterone levels correlated positively with gestational age and negatively with greater weight. Progesterone levels, adjusted for gestational age and maternal weight and expressed as multiples of median (MoM), were significantly lower in OSA cases compared to controls in both the first trimester (MoM = 0.71, confidence interval [95% CI] 0.60-0.83) relative to the MoM in controls of 1.00. In the second trimester levels were also lower in OSA cases (MoM = 0.84, 95% CI 0.73-0.96) compared to the MoM of 1.00 in controls. CONCLUSIONS: Progesterone levels, after accounting for weight and gestational age, were lower in women with OSA than controls. Progesterone may play a protective role against OSA.

Obstructive sleep apnea is associated with alterations in markers of fetoplacental wellbeing.

BACKGROUND: Obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) has been associated with adverse fetal outcomes in some studies. Second trimester Down syndrome screening markers reflect fetal and fetoplacental wellbeing. We aimed to compare markers of fetal and feto-placental wellbeing in women with OSA and low risk controls. METHODS: A retrospective case-control study of pregnant women with OSA and available second trimester markers was performed. Controls were screened for sleep disordered breathing (SDB) at the time of delivery using a questionnaire. Women at low risk for OSA were selected. Marker levels were adjusted for gestational age and race and reported as multiples of median and later adjusted for body mass index (BMI). RESULTS: Twenty-four OSA cases and 166 controls were identified. Women with OSA had a higher mean BMI when compared to controls (37.1 ± 12.7 versus 24.1 ± 5.1, p = 0.03). Estriol (uE3) multiples of the median (MoM) levels were lower in women with OSA compared to controls, even after adjusting for BMI, 0.74 (interquartile range (IQR) 0.45) versus 1.06 (IQR 0.38), respectively, p = 0.026. Once adjusted for BMI, alpha feto-protein (AFP) MoM levels were no longer significantly different in women with OSA compared to controls. CONCLUSION: OSA is associated with reduced serum uE3 levels, independently of BMI, possibly indicating fetal distress.

Placenta-secreted circulating markers in pregnant women with obstructive sleep apnea.

AIMS: Obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) is associated with placenta-mediated adverse clinical outcomes. We aimed at comparing placenta-secreted proteins, such as first and second trimester Down syndrome screening markers which have been linked to preeclampsia, and markers of angiogenesis in pregnant women with OSA, and pregnant controls at low risk for OSA. METHODS: A case-control study of pregnant women with OSA and controls at low risk for OSA was performed. Levels of first and second trimester markers were reported as multiple of median (MoM), and adjusted for body mass index (BMI). Stored samples were tested for markers of angiogenesis and adjusted for gestational age, BMI, and chronic hypertension. RESULTS: A total of 24 women with OSA and 166 controls had screening markers. BMI was higher in cases compared to controls, P=0.01. MoM levels of placenta associated plasma protein-A (PAPP-A) were significantly lower in cases versus controls, even after adjusting for BMI (0.52 IQR 0.48 vs. 1.01 IQR 0.63, P=0.009). The ratio of soluble vascular endothelial growth factor receptor 1 to placental growth factor was significantly higher in cases than controls, even after adjusting for confounders (4.42 IQR 2.52 vs. 2.93 IQR 2.01, P=0.009). CONCLUSION: Circulating placenta-secreted glycoproteins and markers of angiogenesis are altered in pregnant women with OSA.

Caregiver presence and patient completion of a transitional care intervention.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the association between family caregiver presence and patient completion of the Care Transitions Intervention (CTI), a patient activation model that provides transitional care coaching for 30 days following hospital discharge. STUDY DESIGN: A convenience sample of 2747 fee-for-service Medicare patients recruited for the CTI during inpatient medical hospitalizations at 6 hospitals in Rhode Island between January 1, 2009 and June 31, 2011. METHODS: As part of an effectiveness trial of the CTI, Transitions Coaches recruited patients prior to hospital discharge. When a family caregiver was present during recruitment, the patient and family caregiver were coached together or the family caregiver was coached independently. RESULTS: We hypothesized that CTI participation would be equivalent for the 2265 coached patients without a family caregiver present at recruitment, versus the 482 patients with a family caregiver. After adjusting for significant covariates, patients with family caregivers were more than 5 times as likely to complete the intervention as patients without family caregivers (AOR = 5.48; 95% CI = 4.22-7.12). Men with family caregivers were nearly 8 times as likely to complete the intervention as men without family caregivers (AOR = 7.94; 95% CI = 5.26-11.98). CONCLUSIONS: The inclusion of a family caregiver is associated with a greater rate of completing the CTI for post discharge coaching, particularly among men; the inclusion of a family caregiver is a feasible modification to the CTI program.

Is implementation of the care transitions intervention associated with cost avoidance after hospital discharge?

BACKGROUND: Poorly-executed transitions out of the hospital contribute significant costs to the healthcare system. Several evidence-based interventions can reduce post-discharge utilization. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the cost avoidance associated with implementation of the Care Transitions Intervention (CTI). DESIGN: A quasi-experimental cohort study using consecutive convenience sampling. PATIENTS: Fee-for-service Medicare beneficiaries hospitalized from 1 January 2009 to 31 May 2011 in six Rhode Island hospitals. INTERVENTION: The CTI is a patient-centered coaching intervention to empower individuals to better manage their health. It begins in-hospital and continues for 30 days, including one home visit and one to two phone calls. MAIN MEASURES: We examined post-discharge total utilization and costs for patients who received coaching (intervention group), who declined or were lost to follow-up (internal control group), and who were eligible, but not approached (external control group), using propensity score matching to control for baseline differences. KEY RESULTS: Compared to matched internal controls (N = 321), the intervention group had significantly lower utilization in the 6 months after discharge and lower mean total health care costs ($14,729 vs. $18,779, P = 0.03). The cost avoided per patient receiving the intervention was $3,752, compared to internal controls. Results for the external control group were similar. Shifting of costs to other utilization types was not observed. CONCLUSIONS: This analysis demonstrates that the CTI generates meaningful cost avoidance for at least 6 months post-hospitalization, and also provides useful metrics to evaluate the impact and cost avoidance of hospital readmission reduction programs.

Association of dementia with early rehospitalization among Medicare beneficiaries.

Preventable hospital readmissions have been recognized as indicators of hospital quality, a source of increased healthcare expenditures, and a burden for patients, families, and caregivers. Despite growth of initiatives targeting risk factors associated with potentially avoidable hospital readmissions, the impact of dementia on the likelihood of rehospitalization is poorly characterized. Therefore, the primary objective of this retrospective cohort study was to investigate whether dementia was an independent predictor of 30-day readmissions. Administrative claims data for all admissions to Rhode Island hospitals in 2009 was utilized to identify hospitalizations of Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries with a diagnosis of Alzheimer's Disease or other dementias. Demographics, measures of comorbid disease burden, and other potential confounders were extracted from the data and the odds of 30-day readmission to any United States hospital was calculated from conditional logistic regression models. From a sample of 25,839 hospitalizations, there were 3908 index admissions of Medicare beneficiaries who fulfilled the study criteria for a dementia diagnosis. Nearly 20% of admissions (n=5133) were followed by a readmission within thirty days. Hospitalizations of beneficiaries with a dementia diagnosis were more likely to be followed by a readmission within thirty days (adjusted odds ratio (AOR) 1.18; 95% CI, 1.08, 1.29), compared to hospitalizations of those of without dementia. Controlling for discharge site of care did not attenuate the association (AOR 1.21; 95% CI, 1.10, 1.33).

Recruiting hospitalized patients for research: how do participants differ from eligible nonparticipants?

BACKGROUND: Randomized controlled trials provide strong evidence for guidelines and interventions. Yet, much of the eligible population declines to be studied. OBJECTIVE: To identify differences between participants and eligible nonparticipants in (1) perceived stress, (2) self-efficacy, (3) recovery expectations, (4) discussing advance directives, and (5) understanding a standard prescription label (health literacy). DESIGN: Quasi-experimental prospective cohort study in 5 acute-care hospitals. METHODS: We approached 295 hospital inpatients as they were being recruited for a behavioral intervention and asked them to answer 5 screening questions. We matched respondents' answers to their acceptance of the behavioral intervention and to Medicare claims and enrollment data. We used multivariate logistic regression to compare consent rates based on screening-question responses. SETTING/PATIENTS: Hospitalized fee-for-service Medicare patients. RESULTS: Patients were less likely to consent to the behavioral intervention when they reported feeling unable to control important things in their lives (odds ratio [OR]: 0.35, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.14-0.92), had low recovery expectations (OR: 0.17, 95% CI: 0.06-0.45), or were confused by any question (OR: 0.11, 95% CI: 0.05-0.24). Conversely, individuals who answered the medication question incorrectly were more likely to consent to the behavioral intervention (OR: 3.82, 95% CI: 1.12-13.03). There were no significant differences in consent for patients who reported feeling overwhelmed or reported discussing advance care planning with family members or doctors. CONCLUSIONS: Hospitalized eligible nonparticipants differ in constructs related to perceived stress, recovery expectation, and health literacy. Recognizing such characteristics may inform strategies to improve intervention recruitment in the hospital and representation in clinical trials.

The care transitions intervention: translating from efficacy to effectiveness.

BACKGROUND: Well-executed communication among hospital providers, patients, and receiving providers at the time of hospital discharge contributes to better health outcomes and lower overall health care costs. The Care Transitions Intervention has reduced 30-day hospital readmissions by 30% in a randomized controlled trial in an integrated health system but requires real-world testing to establish effectiveness in other settings. We hypothesized that coaching would reduce 30-day readmission rates for fee-for-service Medicare beneficiaries, even in open, urban health care delivery systems. METHODS: This was a quasi-experimental prospective cohort study. From January 1, 2009, through June 30, 2010, coaches recruited a convenience sample of fee-for-service Medicare patients in 6 Rhode Island hospitals to receive the Care Transitions Intervention. We paired coaching data with Medicare claims and enrollment data and used logistic regression to compare the odds of 30-day readmission for the intervention group vs internal and external control groups. RESULTS: Compared with individuals who did not receive any part of the intervention (20.0% readmission rate), 30-day readmissions were fewer for participants who received coaching (12.8%; odds ratio, 0.61; 95% confidence interval, 0.42-0.88). Individuals in the internal control group (declined to participate or were lost to follow-up before completing a home visit) had readmission rates similar to those of the external control group (18.6%; odds ratio, 0.94, 95% confidence interval, 0.77-1.14). CONCLUSIONS: The Care Transitions Intervention appears to be effective in this real-world implementation. This finding underscores the opportunity to improve health outcomes beginning at the time of discharge in open health care settings.

Identifying star performers: the relationship between ambitious targets and nursing home quality improvement.

Setting Targets--Achieving Results (STAR) is a Web-based tool that helps nursing home leadership select annual performance goals, or targets, for a subset of publicly reported quality measures. Previous results demonstrate that nursing homes whose staff implement STAR targets demonstrate greater improvement on the related outcomes. In this analysis, the authors hypothesized that nursing homes whose staff select the most ambitious targets (reflecting large improvement over their current performance) may be more successful in their related quality improvement efforts than homes with less-ambitious targets (reflecting lesser improvement). The authors analyzed data from 7,091 Medicare- or Medicaid-certified nursing homes that set STAR targets in 2005 or 2006 for two quality measures: the proportion of residents who were physically restrained daily and the proportion of high-risk residents with pressure ulcers. Targets were classified as ambitious or less ambitious based on the 75th and 50th rank-ordered percentiles, respectively. Improvement was calculated using four-quarter averages for baseline (the year ending when the target was set) and remeasurement (the subsequent year). The results indicate that nursing homes with ambitious targets demonstrate greater improvement than their peers selecting less-ambitious targets. With limited federal and local resources to assist providers with quality improvement, target values may be a used as a "flag" to help agencies allocate scarce resources to nursing homes committed to quality improvement efforts and with the organizational capacity to improve.

Aiming for star performance: the relationship between setting targets and improved nursing home quality of care.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate relative improvement among nursing homes that set targets using the Nursing Home Setting Targets-Achieving Results (STAR) Site for 2 quality measures: (1) the proportion of long-stay residents who are physically restrained daily; and (2) the proportion of high-risk long-stay residents who have pressure ulcers. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: This analysis focuses on the 7091 Medicare- and/or Medicaid-certified nursing homes whose staff set STAR targets in 2005 for at least 1 of the 2 quality measures included in this analysis. INTERVENTION: In 2005, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) launched STAR to help nursing homes select annual performance goals, or targets, for 4 outcomes that CMS publicly reports quarterly on Nursing Home Compare. Volunteer nursing homes used STAR to evaluate current clinical performance, identify targets, and then track their achievement of those targets. MEASUREMENTS: To assess improvement, the project team calculated 4-quarter averages for baseline (ending the quarter when the target was set) and remeasurement (ending the quarter when the target expired) time periods. The team also estimated the number of lives impacted by improvements associated with setting STAR targets. RESULTS: When compared to nursing homes that did not set physical restraint or pressure ulcer targets, nursing homes that set a target had significantly greater relative improvement for the associated quality measure. In particular, nursing homes that set physical restraint targets improved nearly twice as much on the physical restraint quality measure. These trends persisted regardless of nursing home characteristics (eg, facility size or membership in a multifacility corporation) or nursing homes' intensive participation in work with their state's Quality Improvement Organization (QIO). During the 1-year observation period, target setting was associated with 2576 fewer residents at risk for pressure ulcers developing a pressure ulcer and 4321 fewer residents being physically restrained. CONCLUSION: These analyses demonstrate consistently greater relative improvement among nursing homes that set STAR targets for the daily physical restraint or high-risk pressure ulcer quality measures than among nursing homes that did not set these targets. Although the absolute improvement is relatively small-less than 1% for each quality measure-the number of residents affected is substantial. If STAR targets were routinely incorporated into practice and this level of improvement realized by all nursing homes nationwide, an estimated 45,000 residents would experience better pressure ulcer and physical restraint outcomes at the end of 1 year.